I used to study philosophy. Specifically, the philosophy of
technology and hermeneutics. In the philosophy of technology, there
has recently (recently in academic terms at least) been an increase
in interest in Michel Foucault's late lectures. In these lectures
he continues his examination of power, but turns toward a more
'appropriating' sense of power. To do so, he returns to an ancient
Greek understanding of 'technologies of the self'. Of course, the
term 'technologies' is a bit ambiguous here.
It could also be rendered broadly as 'techniques' of the self, or
'practices' of the self. Nevertheless, through philosophers like
Peter-Paul Verbeek, it has indeed been applied to how we conceive
of modern technologies.
It is also related to the question of hermeneutics (some lectures
are under the title 'hermeneutics of the self'). Hermeneutics is
the study of interpretation.
So, putting all this together, we could say that Foucault's late
lectures are about how the self comes to know/interpret itself
though various technologies/practices/techniques.
The twist is that the 'self' is not a fixed thing, or really a
'thing' at all. So, in the same way that Foucault linked
'knowledge' to 'power/production' in his more famous works, the
question of knowledge of oneself here is also linked to
self-production. All the self *is* is a kind of history/record of
the tools used to produce it
By interpreting/examining myself, I am producing a certain kind of
self. Interpretation is always a qualitative procedure, not a
quantitative one.
One of Foucault's main examples here is the classic Greek dictum
'know thyself', a founding thought for western philosophy and
science.
Foucault points out the context for this kind of command is usually
missed. It can be linked to the practice of visiting the oracle at
Delphi. Before going in to ask the oracle a question, you had to
first examine yourself and discern the most potent question.
In other words, self-knowledge/self-examination was linked to the
broader practice of caring for oneself and directing oneself. You
never just tried to 'know' yourself for the sake of 'science' or
'knowledge', there was always an ulterior motive.
This, of course, *is* how self-knowledge functions in modern
society, it's just that sometimes we take 'knowledge', especially
the kind produced by the sciences, in an overly-neutral sense.
For example, in a positive way, Verbeek has used Foucault's sense
of 'technologies of the self' to frame the introduction of birth
control into society in the 70s. Medical/anatomical/chemical
knowledge produced this simple technology which, in turn, led to a
radical transformation of women's freedoms.
In the negative sense, knowledge of your browsing patterns by major
corporations like Facebook and Google can lead to many practical
consequences too. Maybe you spent to long browsing the Steam store
and now that perfect job-advertisement doesn't pop up on your
screen because you've been marked 'undesirable'. And so on...
In short, self-knowledge is always about self-transformation.
Furthermore, self-knowledge/transformation is always about *power*
and the process of *subjecting* yourself to a power (we become a
'subject' through 'subjectivation'). The ethical task is to
appropriate this process. Instead of subjecting ourselves to major
tech corporations, and becoming their subjects, we should instead
harness the power of technologies to produce a self of our own
making.
In even shorter terms, this post is supposed to be a journal entry.
I've been avoiding the question of self-examination by going on
about the philosophy of self-examination. Hopefully, this is just
preparation for the actual self-examination.
One of Foucault's common 'techniques of the self' is keeping a
diary. The simple act transforms how one thinks and acts in daily
life. That's why I started talking about him here. I was also
wondering about what kind of 'technology of the self' gopher/gemini
are?
I will try harder in the future to talk more about myself. I think
too much about other things and not enough about myself.
